Organic Pop Tarts
Countertop encounters an oddity.
So, we are watching a friends kid the next couple of nights. The wife is your typical Volvo driving, Whole Foods shopping, clueless DC yuppie liberal (I’m surprised she lets her kid stay here, what with all my guns, but her husband makes the decisions in the family . . . she’s far too interested maintaining her lifestyle than to ever question her husband).
As an example, she dropped her kid off tonight, along with food. Amongst the many Whole Foods selections she dropped off for him (or Safeway food simply isn’t good enough) were some organic pop tarts.
Think about that.
Think about what? The fact that they think that it’s OK for hubby to do all the thinking? Or the easy condescension about “typical DC Yuppies”?
Oh, the Tarts. What’s the big deal? Pop Tarts are just a pastry that warms up in a toaster. You can make them yourself with a little pie dough and some jam. They’re pie. Who doesn’t like pie?
If someone wants to pay for organic sweet things, isn’t that OK? Think it’s hypocritical? You’re getting upset because the DC Yuppie isn’t conforming to your mental model of a health-food nut, and it’s their fault? Your undies get bundled about that, but not Bush. See, I mentioned Bush in the first post! Everything comes back to Bush, even Pop Tarts. You see “organic” marketing spin and blame the people who buy them - for what? Turn it around. A company saw a demand in the market and filled it. This is capitalism at work.
Doesn’t look like there was much thinking going on at either the original poster or the hat tip; neither has any comments. Here’s a thread from some super-Christians who also freak about the “organic pop tarts” they found at Costco.
Next up, let’s talk about something a bit more relevant, such as whether most popular American beers are actually “beer.”
Posted by John Foust on October 01, 2007 at 0731 hrs
Organic junk food! Oh my god, that’s so crazy my head’s about to explode!
So get this: There are points on the spectrum between McDonald’s fatties and tofu nibblers. I imagine the kids whined for Pop Tarts and the parents gave in, but made a choice to get a brand that does a little less damage to their kids and the world. Probably just as much sugar as the Kelloggs brand, but no preservatives or other chemicals, which most parents would agree is a good thing. And organic crops are grown without fertilizers or pesticides, which means there’s less crap going on to the soil and eventually washing into rivers and waterways. And since there are no fertilizers being used, there’s less dependence on foreign oil.
Pretty smart choice, I’d say. Except for the 10 tablespoons of sugar or whatever, but that’s another discussion.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 01, 2007 at 0732 hrs
Actually Gordon because organics are grown without pesticides and chemical fertilizers there is MORE crap going into the earth.
I am all for buying better food. There is a huge difference between the effects of highly processed high fructose corn syrup and regular cane (or beet sugar). I am not sold on every aspect of the organic movement. I think there is a lot of junk science being peddled but it is hard to argue with the general premise.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 01, 2007 at 0812 hrs
The Frosted Arugula and Sprouts are the best of the organic poptarts followed by the Zuchinni Swirl
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 01, 2007 at 0855 hrs
No, Grumps, my fave at the health food store are the “Organic Minerals.”
Posted by John Foust on October 01, 2007 at 0915 hrs
I agree with this:
Organic marketers imply and state that their products are healthier. But this is simply not true.
No scientific study shows that organic foods are safer, healthier or more nutritious than conventional foods. The “organic” label only means that the products were raised inefficiently without benefit of several modern technologies.
...Marketing and labels that imply otherwise hardly educate the public. Mostly, they line the pockets of the companies selling them at a premium…
How about this for an idea: organic cigarettes. Cut out a few chemicals in the process, and then they can sell them in the vending machines in the schools.
Depending on the kids’ mood that day, they could choose from some Virginia Brightleaf or a Western Kentucky Aromatic Fire-cured variety.
Cut out the big tobacco companies and have the small-time growers distribute natural boutique varieties for the parents who care about what their children smoke. After all, if it’s labeled as organic it must be healthy right?
Posted by David on October 01, 2007 at 1056 hrs
American Spirit Organic cigs? Been done, already talked about. Carcinogens? Which ones, the ones they put in, the ones they take out, or the ones that were there all along?
Which do you prefer, homegrown tomato or one shipped from California? Think all those people shopping at the local farmer’s market are foolish? Is it possible that someone prefers the taste of a more natural fruit Pop-Tart than one with pink frosting and a chemical sugar taste?
Marketing? I want to meet the marketroid who came up with the idea of buying baking soda and then pouring it down the drain. Use the whole box!
Posted by John Foust on October 01, 2007 at 1126 hrs
For me, if a tomato was shipped from California it actually would be “homegrown” since I live in San Diego
My point, in case you missed it, was that just because something is labeled as “organic” proves it is neither any healthier nor safer than those without the label. Pure feelgoodism.
Buying something from a farmer’s roadside stand or market is probably more fresh and of better quality from the standpoint of taste. But there is no evidence that it is safer and healthier than something packaged, processed, and stocked at grocery store - be it Whole Foods or Wal-Mart.
Posted by David on October 01, 2007 at 1157 hrs
But John,
Where do we go for fresh veggies 9 months out of the year if we aren’t supposed to buy stuff from California (or Chile, Australia, etc.)?
Organic and local is fine if you want to spend more. Personal choice. But you gotta admit that organic junk food is kinda humorous.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 01, 2007 at 1158 hrs
THANK YOU, rc. Yes, it is kinda humorous, which was the whole point. I didn’t mean to launch a vitriolic debate about the merits of organic food, etc.
If y’all want to have that debate, then have at it, but may I suggest that you all try to lighten up and just acknowledge when something is kinda funny?
Posted by Owen on October 01, 2007 at 1211 hrs
I suppose it’s an arguable point whether or not organic food is any healthier for a person than non-organic. I’m certainly no expert on nutrition, so I can’t really say. Where I come down in favor of organic food is that it uses no chemical pesticides and fertilizers. If only it were competitive pricewise…
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 01, 2007 at 1216 hrs
What’s funny is them telling us that carob is as good as chocolate for all thses years.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 01, 2007 at 1226 hrs
RC, there’s more than a few hothouses around SE Wisconsin that grow great tomatoes.
Svendsen, yes, I’d call most tomatoes that arrive from California “its” as well. Flavorless mush.
Owen, it’s always “kinda funny” when we can tie something to “clueless DC yuppie liberals”, isn’t it? What made this funny, the backstory to insult anyone who watches and tastes the food they eat, drives a Volvo or shops at Whole Foods, or the organic toaster pastries themselves - which, as I’ve shown, may just as well come from Costco?
Posted by John Foust on October 01, 2007 at 1354 hrs
I don’t fuss over organic food. Don’t see the point. I’m all for eating healthier, but i never saw a lot of sense in it.
At the same time, the writer of that blog is a snotty biotch who needs to take a step back from himself and realize that people who care about things like nutrition shouldn’t be scored - even if they don’t always know what they’re doing.
And what’s with that banner image? Freaky.
Posted by scott on October 01, 2007 at 2033 hrs
Sorry, I can’t let this thing go.
I was going to call “bullsh*t” on the blogger for claiming that the Pop-Tarts® were organic. In a way, it is bullsh*t, because there is no such thing as organic Pop-Tarts®.
What the mom probably brought for her kid was organic toaster pastries. I found some made by a company called Nature’s Path Foods.
From a strictly nutritional standpoint, the Pop-Tarts® are “healthier”. They have less calories, less saturated fat, less carbs, and more vitamins than the Nature’s Path brand.
A quick check of Amazon.com shows the Nature’s Path pastries are much more expensive too.
Now, we all know that groceries will vary wildly in price from one place to another, every day of the year. If I was in the market for some toaster pastries and saw the the Nature’s Path pastries on sale for cheaper than the Pop-Tarts®, I’d probably buy them.
So yeah, this guy seems a little bent out of shape about the pastries. Plus, I like Volvos. They’re better than Ford, Chevy and Chrysler IMHO.
And you’re right scott, that guy’s banner image is a little creepy. My initial thought was, “Does he live on Milwaukee’s North side?” But we know he doesn’t.
He explains the image on his about page:
...actually stole it from an NRA brochure that I never saw in person (or even on their web page) but that the gun banners reprinted throughout the internet as a way to mock them.
Well, mock away, I thought the art was awsome and figured I’d just lift it myself.
Still not sure what the appeal is of the image. Not a situation (or neighborhood) in which I’d ever want to find myself.
But now I want some of them pastries. As with most of the things I purchase (except cars) the lowest price will win. Nature’s Path better hope that Ralph’s has those things on clearance. Or chemical-injected Pop-Tarts® it shall be!
Abide…
Posted by David on October 01, 2007 at 2342 hrs
And I call B.S. on you, too. I compare the organic Brown Sugar Maple Cinnamon Frosted Toaster Pastries you mentioned (rightmost, first row) to Kellogg’s Pop Tarts® Brown Sugar Cinnamon. Serving size, 52 g. to 50 g. so the organic is 4% larger. Calories, 210 to 219. Total fat, 4.5 g. to 9 g. Sat fat, 3 g. to 9 g. Sodium, 125 mg. to 214. Carbs, 39 to 32. Vitamin A, 0 to 10% - looks like Kellogg’s fortified. Calcium, iron, vitamin C, the same. The organic wins in almost all categories.
Posted by John Foust on October 02, 2007 at 0907 hrs
I think everyone’s missing the point. Organic does NOT by definition mean that a given food item has more vitamins or less fats or whatever. The organic label indicates how a food item and its ingredients were produced. For example, the organic toaster pastries in question would include wheat and fruit grown without conventional pesticides, artificial fertilizers or sewage sludge. What does this mean? Less synthetic pesticides leaching into the ground and eventually drinking water, for instance, and less dependence on external inputs, such as fertilizers.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 02, 2007 at 0939 hrs
And another aspect is the amount of processing of the raw food: whole ground wheat versus heavily processed wheat where some parts are taken out and other substances added. Another is the probability that health-food store or organic foods will have been produced more locally - raspberries from the USA as opposed to Poland, for example.
Posted by John Foust on October 02, 2007 at 0954 hrs
Serving size, 52 g. to 50 g. so the organic is 4% larger.
Find me the person who is going to stop eating the organic one with only 4% of it left so as not to eat more calories than the Pop-Tarts®. Toaster pastries are one of the rare foods where a “serving” actually matches up to what a person will eat in one sitting. One Pop-Tarts® vs. one Nature’s Path organic pastry: you’re getting fatter off the organic one.I’m giving the D.C. yuppie mom the benefit of the doubt and will assume that she bought the pastries because they were on sale, or it was simply an impulse buy when she saw them. If she really did believe she is saving her kids lives by giving them organic toaster pastries in lieu of Pop-Tarts®, then maybe she is as LoOnY as the blogger implies.
Posted by David on October 02, 2007 at 1016 hrs
I doesn’t need to be about “saving her kids lives.” Maybe she just doesn’t like the fact that almost everything we eat has corn in it, or that it all seems processed beyond recognition, or that so many chemicals are used in its production. Maybe she doesn’t know exactly how to address all these issues, but it occurs to her that buying something labeled organic might be a decent stab at some of it.
I don’t get the level of hostility leveled at this woman. Not by the blogger or the commenters here. I mean I hate to bring it up again, but if I had to pick the “looney” in this little scenario, I’d go with Mr. scary urban survivalist banner image over Ms. organic pastries - in a heartbeat.
Posted by scott on October 02, 2007 at 1039 hrs
I agree with Scott. I don’t get the hostility either. Isn’t this the American thing to do? Isn’t buying organic a luxury that we have, like driving SUV’s? It might not be necessary, or even rational, but excess is what America is about. Obviously the whole world can’t eat organic food (if we tried, at least a billion people would starve to death) but in America, if you want to shop at Whole Foods, you should. It’s no more loony than buying your 8-year-old daughter a gun.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 02, 2007 at 1054 hrs
It’s way less looney.
Anyway, I’m a lot more interested in buying locally produced food, and eating food that is as unprocessed as I can. In reality, about the best I can do is get one good mean a week out of the farmer’s market. Such is the busy lifestyle of a single dad.
Posted by scott on October 02, 2007 at 1057 hrs
I agree that the “urban survivalist” (that is funny!) came across as pretty hostile. I hope he doesn’t equate the rioters outside the window with a Volvo-driving, organic-buying mom.
Has this thread outlived its usefulness yet?
Posted by David on October 02, 2007 at 1156 hrs
Scott, it’s because the mom was painted as a mindless liberal. That’s what made it funny. As I pointed out, there’s plenty of conservative Christians who like to eat naturally, too, and I pointed to some who were talking about organic toaster pastries. Making fun of them wouldn’t be funny - that would be mocking Christ’s followers.
I think Matthew 25 says, “Whatsoever you do for the least of my brothers, that you do unto me… Except the “liberals.” You can do whatever you like to them, they’re the butt of the joke.”
As I said, I was appalled at the easy dismissal of the wife’s mental powers (“but her husband makes the decisions in the family… she’s far too interested maintaining her lifestyle than to ever question her husband”) and that notion that this woman is trusting her kids to the author, yet the author thinks so little of her - and doesn’t say a word. Two-faced, you think?
Posted by John Foust on October 02, 2007 at 1639 hrs
What was so difficult about the original post? It was a simple commentary about 1. No one drops food off with their kids unless they’re worried about your food, a strange thing to worry about in a house full of guns, and 2. Organic pop tarts: the yuppy equivalent of light beer or low tar cigarettes.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 02, 2007 at 1659 hrs
Baloney.
1. Plenty of people drop off food with their child. Either a) their child is a picky eater and they will want familiar foods, and/or b) they do not want to impose upon you to feed the child.
2. The perfectly understandable reasons that one might have to buy such things has already been well discussed. I suggest you reread them.
Posted by scott on October 02, 2007 at 1800 hrs
No, it hasn’t been well discussed, and would be utterly meaningless (like light beer and low tar cigarettes) and there is no evidence of a picky eater. The original poster clearly noted his food wasn’t good enough. A simple post that wound up revealing more about the commenters than the blogger. Thanks for sharing, though.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 02, 2007 at 1825 hrs
No Scott, any discussion about organic pop tarts is pointless (like light beer and low tar cigarettes), and there is no evidence of a picky eater and the original poster noted his own food wasn’t good enough. A simple post that revealed more about the commenters than the blogger. Thanks for sharing, though.
Good one Countertop. Who’d thought a pop tart would get all religious on us.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 02, 2007 at 1831 hrs
there is no evidence of a picky eater.
You mean mr. gunhappy doesn’t relate any such evidence. Yawn. C’mon. Every young kid is picky to some degree. We don’t have to presume the mother’s disapproval of the guy’s food when we learn she has sent him with some of his own from home. Doing so is just being stubborn and unreasonable. (I’m hiding my shock!)
A simple post that wound up revealing more about the commenters than the blogger.
No. it’s a post that reveals much more about the blogger than it does about the subject of the post. And now it reveals a great deal about the current commenters, too.
Posted by scott on October 02, 2007 at 1935 hrs
You’re right Scott, we don’t have to presume mom’s disapproval because in fact the original poster provided us that fact. No need to presume anything. I guess that would require reading his post, but I know how you feel about reading links.
What we have is a 30 comment post where people have projected themselves onto two people they have never met and know nothing about, and a pop tart.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 02, 2007 at 2138 hrs
Scott, Owen didn’t really say anything beyond “encounters an oddity” and “it’s kinda funny.” It’s one of those “If you know what I mean and I think that you do” kind of posts. As I’ve pointed out several times now (and yes, I never get tired of some things) it’s only funny because they were making fun of a liberal.
Posted by John Foust on October 02, 2007 at 2154 hrs
Good grief. The point of the post is that “organic PopTart” is an oxymoron. You know, jumbo shrimp, big baby,...
Sometimes things are just odd. Let it go.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 02, 2007 at 2205 hrs
the original poster provided us that fact.
The original poster provided us with nothing but an assertion. And, yes, I read the original post.
It could be that the kids mother is an idiotic bitch. What would I know? But there’s no real case made against her. Sending your kid to someone’s home with their own snacks is not really evidence of a damned thing, as I indicated before. I’ve done it myself. Plenty of parents do. I think it only takes on sinister proportions when you have a deep need to knock your non-gun-owning organic-grocery-store-shopping neighbors.
What we have is a 30 comment post where people have projected themselves onto two people they have never met and know nothing about
Yes, that’s exactly what we have. One camp is mocking the intellect of the parent(s) of a child who showed up with organic pop-tarts, while the other camp is saying that’s not really grounds to make such negative statements about anyone.
Plus, I’ll say it a third time. I feel a lot more comfortable making a judgement about the original blogger than I do about anyone else involved: the paranoid banner speaks way louder than any toaster pastry ever could.
A further irony: I have very little patience for crystal-toting pseudo-scientific new-agers who think that putting “medicated” bandages on the soles of their feet is going to remove the “toxins” from their bodies. Such people make me roll my eyes violently. I am not one to indulge such nonsense, but some of y’all are being pretty unreasonable on this.
Posted by scott on October 02, 2007 at 2257 hrs
You don’t get it Scott. It wasn’t a post about a person, and no one here has written anything about the purchaser of said pop tart. It was a post about a pop tart, that’s all.
One can get deeper and think about it as the poster requested and arrive at the conclusion that the organic pop tart is a bit of an oxymoron as Wendy pointed out, that is all. The mocking began in comment 14.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 03, 2007 at 0818 hrs
Okay. One side here is on the “lighten up and realize it’s kinda funny” camp, without really specifying what in fact is so funny - the woman or the product or both. The other side seems to be saying that the original poster is, in addition to being kind of scary, an ass who makes disparaging statements about the woman in question, based (as far as we know) solely on her shopping habits and/or what she packs with her child when dropping him off.
“His blog entry is kind of funny” versus “the dude is off his rocker.” Consider me in the latter camp.
Posted by scott on October 03, 2007 at 0836 hrs
Scott -
Change the helicopter parent lady to a conservative and the organic pop tart is STILL funny.
jeesh - no sense of humor at all…..
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 03, 2007 at 0858 hrs
Well maybe to you it is. To me it’s about a 3.5 on the ironic-o-meter, at best. But what I find noteworthy about the whole thing is this: the dude goes off on her for what is essentially nothing. Plus the fact that he looks to be a bit of a nut himself. Then along comes Owen & co. to say “ha, organic pastry humor…and most definitely nothing else to see here!”
I think that about sums up the entire phenomenon.
Posted by scott on October 03, 2007 at 0907 hrs
I stick with my assessments. Would it be fun and would it be posted if it was what anyone would agree was junk food trying to pretend it’s healthy? Like “No saturated fat” - even though the product never had it, never will. “Gee, marketing lies to us” isn’t on the radar, it’s 1.5 on the scale. Adding the liberals and the guns raised it to 4.5, so it was posted.
Posted by John Foust on October 03, 2007 at 0933 hrs
Ah, yes. The all-knowing Foust gets into Owen’s mind and determines the real reason he posted something silly about a pop tart.
Get over yourself.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 03, 2007 at 0942 hrs
Saying it’s not about the freaky dude, nor about how he went off on the woman for nothing, but rather it’s about the oh-so-harmless humor of organic junk food would be a little bit like watching a clown attack someone on the street with an umbrella and then saying “teeny tiny cars are kind of funny! Clown attack? What clown?”
Posted by scott on October 03, 2007 at 0953 hrs
Wendy, with the dearth of commentary in the original post, us visitors are forced to draw our own conclusions. You call it my inflated ego, I call it building traffic for your web site. Meow!
It’s not my fault that Owen chooses to not explain himself. He doesn’t have to, he can do it however he likes. If he wants to have a hundred posts that say “Huh?” followed by a quote from someone else’s blog, that’s his right. Why complain when visitors expand, extemporize and riff on the topic after that?
Please, join us and extemporize on why this wasn’t extra “funny” all because it picked on a liberal mom and mentioned guns.
Posted by John Foust on October 03, 2007 at 1022 hrs
JF, Scott, etc.
My comment was specific to the odd concept of an “organic pop tart.” I had never heard of such a thing, thought it was funny, and decided to share. Anything beyond that is purely of your own fantasies.
But thanks for sharing.
If you dig deep into your gut, there’s a little nodule of flesh attached to the underside of your liver. That’s your sense of humor. See if you can find it.
Posted by Owen on October 03, 2007 at 1106 hrs
I assure you, you have done absolutely nothing to drive traffic to this blog. You are mentally incapable of adding anything positive to anything.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 03, 2007 at 1108 hrs
Owen, that’s fine by me. It is not my position that you meant something different. I have no “fantasy” about what you do or don’t believe. It is simply my position that it’s odd for you to see that as the only significant and noteworthy aspect of the guys blog entry. I find it much more noteworthy that the guy seems a bit like a weirdo and he seems to be attacking the woman with a ferocity not merited by her reported actions.
Posted by scott on October 03, 2007 at 1115 hrs
All us visitors are your traffic, Wendy. Are we not buying enough t-shirts this month?
Posted by John Foust on October 03, 2007 at 1120 hrs
A little late for this thread, but it turns out that organic food actually does have higher levels of nutrients:
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/peter_melchett/2007/10/organics_better_admit_it.html
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 31, 2007 at 0715 hrs
Total Entries: 20000
Total Comments: 134052
Most Recent Entry: 05/25/2012 06:26 am
Most Recent Comment on: 05/25/2012 12:25 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 102
Total anonymous users: 0
Most Recent Visitor on: 05/25/2012 12:46 pm
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).